Comments

I think I'm coming around to seanismorris' thinking¡ Having smaller elements built-into a larger, more complex device is a huge waste. We're moving backwards, people! That's why I now believe that every transitor should be socketed and removable, just like in the good old days of computing. It's what the real pros did. Big Microchip wants you to buy an entire processor with billions of transistors already built into a chip with how some know-nothings thought it should be designed. Let me arrange and then program those transistors how I see fit.

I’m unhappy that I can only “like” this comment. I love it. It’s a wonderfully beautiful “absurdity illustrating the absurd” comparison with just the right blend of sarcasm. Well done!

But in short, consumer have the right to hold his warranty if he or 3rd party opened up or repaired his device.Also companies should provide service if consumer is out of warranty.So Apple's repair terms and conditions will be invalid under this federal law. The only way to go forward is to court apple or any other company who refuse to fix your devices ( that's why there are stickers that say void your warranty if removed)

LTT didn't discuss this because his audience knew about those laws.

People should watch this guy videos about fixing electronic and how companies try to scum consumers. louis rossmann

That's partially what the law says. You're right about the opening up, and the "out of warranty."

But, there is no requirement to force a company to repair a damaged computer if the damage has been done by the user. This condition, and LTT's iMac Pro, does not qualify as "out of warranty" because of the user-inflicted damage.

But in short, consumer have the right to hold his warranty if he or 3rd party opened up or repaired his device.Also companies should provide service if consumer is out of warranty.So Apple's repair terms and conditions will be invalid under this federal law. The only way to go forward is to court apple or any other company who refuse to fix your devices ( that's why there are stickers that say void your warranty if removed)

LTT didn't discuss this because his audience knew about those laws.

People should watch this guy videos about fixing electronic and how companies try to scum consumers. louis rossmann

That's partially what the law says. You're right about the opening up, and the "out of warranty."

But, there is no requirement to force a company to repair a damaged computer if the damage has been done by the user. This condition, and LTT's iMac Pro, does not qualify as "out of warranty" because of the user-inflicted damage.

Rossman's videos are excellent. Highly recommended.

Totally agree, but apple should clearly say the reason of rejection.The only thing that can come to my mind about a company refusing to fix a thing in exchange for money is this thing is risky and can cause harm to the guy who repair it.The worst part, if it got refused and the consumer was not informed about that.

But in short, consumer have the right to hold his warranty if he or 3rd party opened up or repaired his device.Also companies should provide service if consumer is out of warranty.So Apple's repair terms and conditions will be invalid under this federal law. The only way to go forward is to court apple or any other company who refuse to fix your devices ( that's why there are stickers that say void your warranty if removed)

LTT didn't discuss this because his audience knew about those laws.

People should watch this guy videos about fixing electronic and how companies try to scum consumers. louis rossmann

That's partially what the law says. You're right about the opening up, and the "out of warranty."

But, there is no requirement to force a company to repair a damaged computer if the damage has been done by the user. This condition, and LTT's iMac Pro, does not qualify as "out of warranty" because of the user-inflicted damage.

Rossman's videos are excellent. Highly recommended.

Totally agree, but apple should clearly say the reason of rejection.The only thing that can come to my mind about a company refusing to fix a thing in exchange for money is this thing is risky and can cause harm to the guy who repair it.The worst part, if it got refused and the consumer was not informed about that.

There's a lot of blame to go around, here. Some of this saga could have been avoided had Apple been more clear at the Apple Store level, and not punted it to the third party making them refuse for good business reasons -- but not giving the customer the right reason.

The rest would have been skipped had LTT talked about Apple's repair process and procedures in the video.

I can't imagine any real person spending their own money saying, "Charge me MORE to fix an item (with forever-risk) than replacing it."(The exception would be something with sentimental value in a normal-price-range).

Trying to put myself in those shoes. What it boils down to is the info ON the computer.

If I have a backup, and the repair cost is too high (even if it was a $4000-repair against a $5000 computer), considering the risk, just "total" it, A LOT LIKE A CAR.

If I don't have a backup, and the storage is swappable, a very-generous Apple or Auth-Service-Provider might try to swap the storage to a new machine, since storage-replacement can be safe/possible for some computers (less & less with Apple, but I'll take it for the less chance of failure, esp SSD).

(In this case, it was a "company machine", and no one's 1-copy-wedding-video was on there)

"Totalling" something and expecting repair parts KNOWING ITS AT A FINANCIAL LOSS doesn't make sense, unless one is spending others' money.

I saw the video PRIOR to seeing this article - but I'm personally quite baffled that any organization could defend the cost of repair on a device like this and call it just "business".
I'm a business owner - and I call it really, really bad business that replacing any single component in a $5000 machine could cost up to half or even more of the entire purchase price of the device. That, furthermore, the company would not keep some modest inventory of replacement parts is anathema to me.
Apple computers have always had exorbitant repair costs and parts costs (at least in my 20 years of experience as a "non-certified technician who can do any mac repair job for half the cost of the Mac store") but more than a few hundred dollars for a motherboard - maybe a thousand with CPU (I think this one is integrated socket on bga?) and a display assembly at 5k resolution should be roughly 700$ ...being generous. There's no reason to assume that the motherboard was even faulty at all - so $5300 for repair is ludicrous.
If a company cannot support the repair of it's most expensive systems, and if they require that the owner of the machine give up all rights to service that machine themselves - that company doesn't deserve to exist.

I saw the video PRIOR to seeing this article - but I'm personally quite baffled that any organization could defend the cost of repair on a device like this and call it just "business".
I'm a business owner - and I call it really, really bad business that replacing any single component in a $5000 machine could cost up to half or even more of the entire purchase price of the device. That, furthermore, the company would not keep some modest inventory of replacement parts is anathema to me.
Apple computers have always had exorbitant repair costs and parts costs (at least in my 20 years of experience as a "non-certified technician who can do any mac repair job for half the cost of the Mac store") but more than a few hundred dollars for a motherboard - maybe a thousand with CPU (I think this one is integrated socket on bga?) and a display assembly at 5k resolution should be roughly 700$ ...being generous. There's no reason to assume that the motherboard was even faulty at all - so $5300 for repair is ludicrous.
If a company cannot support the repair of it's most expensive systems, and if they require that the owner of the machine give up all rights to service that machine themselves - that company doesn't deserve to exist.

As stated in the article, Intel's volume pricing on the (socketed) processor alone is at the minimum over $1000. And again, this is not an ATX motherboard, it is a workstation motherboard.

Perhaps the pricing is exorbitant -- but nevertheless, that is the pricing. And, like we said, parts are available. As a technician, I'm sure you've declined to repair a device or two in your time for your own reasons.

The arc that led to the tech dropping the screen is a pretty clear indicator that its not just the display.

Yes there are running jokes but through and through it is clear the COMPANY ((Not channel they are a full fledge company with a legal department so again trying to discredit their worth)) has the skills and resources to handle what they where doing.

If they had the skills and resources to handle what they were doing, then why did the iMac break to begin with and why don’t they have their certs and such to work on the machine and order the parts themselves? The certs have been available since December yet here they are acting disgruntled after they totaled the shiny new jag they just bought.

A "void if removed" sticker isn't the issue. As the article imparts, it's in part a parts issue which even authorized partners can't yet participate as there's no parts to partake.

You clearly didn't read the article. The FTC has given 6 large name companies a warning to change these policies in the next 30 days or face lawsuit. I will reference the quote directly:

In other words, a company may not say that its warranty will only be honored if the consumer uses a specific product or service. Or put another way, Apple may not tell you (or threaten) that you’ll void the warranty on your iPhone if you replace a broken screen with non-Apple glass.

You clearly missed the point, as cars don't have "stickers" that claim a warranty is void if you open the hood an play around. I suggest reading the article and the recent note from the FTC that came this month!

At those prices? Give me 16 gigs of Ram. SSD as standard (500 gig ones are much cheaper now...). i7 (folks, it's an old cpu now. OLD!). What about i7 standard with option for an i9? (Well, that would cut off the avenue for the iMac Pro creamium...). And at least a consumer 56 Vega on the mid-tier with the choice of the consumer 64 Vega to upgrade. The high end iMac should have a Vega 64. This is the kind of choice we USED to have with the G3/4/5 towers.

Lemon Bon Bon.

Fine, go make that all in one and stop telling apple what to make or charge.

A "void if removed" sticker isn't the issue. As the article imparts, it's in part a parts issue which even authorized partners can't yet participate as there's no parts to partake.

You clearly didn't read the article. The FTC has given 6 large name companies a warning to change these policies in the next 30 days or face lawsuit. I will reference the quote directly:

In other words, a company may not say that its warranty will only be honored if the consumer uses a specific product or service. Or put another way, Apple may not tell you (or threaten) that you’ll void the warranty on your iPhone if you replace a broken screen with non-Apple glass.

You clearly missed the point, as cars don't have "stickers" that claim a warranty is void if you open the hood an play around. I suggest reading the article and the recent note from the FTC that came this month!

Are you fucking serious right now? Even the owner of the iMac Pro isn't claiming that it should be fixed under warranty as he acknowledges that he broke it. Your love affair with stickers has nothing to do with the article or this iMac Pro issue.

A "void if removed" sticker isn't the issue. As the article imparts, it's in part a parts issue which even authorized partners can't yet participate as there's no parts to partake.

You clearly didn't read the article. The FTC has given 6 large name companies a warning to change these policies in the next 30 days or face lawsuit. I will reference the quote directly:

In other words, a company may not say that its warranty will only be honored if the consumer uses a specific product or service. Or put another way, Apple may not tell you (or threaten) that you’ll void the warranty on your iPhone if you replace a broken screen with non-Apple glass.

You clearly missed the point, as cars don't have "stickers" that claim a warranty is void if you open the hood an play around. I suggest reading the article and the recent note from the FTC that came this month!

This iMac Pro issue with the shattered screen and arc has precisely zero to do with the "void if removed" thing. Totally different matter.

But in short, consumer have the right to hold his warranty if he or 3rd party opened up or repaired his device.Also companies should provide service if consumer is out of warranty.So Apple's repair terms and conditions will be invalid under this federal law. The only way to go forward is to court apple or any other company who refuse to fix your devices ( that's why there are stickers that say void your warranty if removed)

LTT didn't discuss this because his audience knew about those laws.

People should watch this guy videos about fixing electronic and how companies try to scum consumers. louis rossmann

That law does not cover cases in which your computer gets damaged **because** you opened it up. This is what happened:

1) The mac was in working order2) Linus and his crew opened it up without knowing what they were doing3) dead Mac

I saw the video PRIOR to seeing this article - but I'm personally quite baffled that any organization could defend the cost of repair on a device like this and call it just "business".
I'm a business owner - and I call it really, really bad business that replacing any single component in a $5000 machine could cost up to half or even more of the entire purchase price of the device. That, furthermore, the company would not keep some modest inventory of replacement parts is anathema to me.
Apple computers have always had exorbitant repair costs and parts costs (at least in my 20 years of experience as a "non-certified technician who can do any mac repair job for half the cost of the Mac store") but more than a few hundred dollars for a motherboard - maybe a thousand with CPU (I think this one is integrated socket on bga?) and a display assembly at 5k resolution should be roughly 700$ ...being generous. There's no reason to assume that the motherboard was even faulty at all - so $5300 for repair is ludicrous.
If a company cannot support the repair of it's most expensive systems, and if they require that the owner of the machine give up all rights to service that machine themselves - that company doesn't deserve to exist.

Ok, think about, say, having to fix a car. Car parts are worth more than the car itself by a good margin. If you practically have to rebuild a car from new parts then the cost would exceed simply buying a new car. Same thing here. LTT ruined the display, the logic board and the PSU. They basically wrecked the whole computer. The cost of replacing those three components combined would exceed the cost of buying a new iMac Pro.

"Apple reserves the right to refuse service on gear that has been modified by the user, or if there are signs of tampering with the equipment. This is an accountability issue, and sometimes a safety matter for the repair crew."

Is this considered as "against the law" in Canada? Because I knew that in some other countries, the company still have to repair them, no matter how worse the damage was. But if not, there's no way to complained about.

"Apple reserves the right to refuse service on gear that has been modified by the user, or if there are signs of tampering with the equipment. This is an accountability issue, and sometimes a safety matter for the repair crew."

Is this considered as "against the law" in Canada? Because I knew that in some other countries, the company still have to repair them, no matter how worse the damage was. But if not, there's no way to complained about.

Can you show us evidence of a single country that forces a company to repair a machine that is deemed a safety hazard? There are some crazy laws out there, but that seems several bridges too far for any government.

"Apple reserves the right to refuse service on gear that has been modified by the user, or if there are signs of tampering with the equipment. This is an accountability issue, and sometimes a safety matter for the repair crew."

Is this considered as "against the law" in Canada? Because I knew that in some other countries, the company still have to repair them, no matter how worse the damage was. But if not, there's no way to complained about.

Can you show us evidence of a single country that forces a company to repair a machine that is deemed a safety hazard? There are some crazy laws out there, but that seems several bridges too far for any government.

Yeah, I was asking the guy who said this to have an evidence, but he went crazy and refuses to give me that... Guess I should said "I heard" instead "I knew" then, but then just a little flamed makes me confuse.Guess I'll find out by myself.

But at least, there isn't such law like this in both U.S. or Canada, or more specifically, in which the town/city/province where Linus live?

Anyway, after briefly read the first and last two pages of this post, here's my conclusion:

Linus Team basically disassembled their machine, and broke it themselves, which in this case -- it's their own fault. Not only that's not guaranteed in the warranty, but also not against any laws in both the U.S. and Canada. Even if they admitted and willing to pay, it still won't change their policy.

Then Linus sent the iMac Pro to the local Apple store, and somehow did manage to swap the power supply, as it's not broken by Linus Team. For both the motherboard and the screen, they have to purchased themselves via authorized third party. But for some reason, it's not available -- at least that's what their video is claiming, and actually, it was wrong, as the parts now are available for the third party, and they can easily get them.

Basically, the video biased a little too much, and they didn't understand how repairing services work. Apple does not done this for pissing the customers off or evil business, just simply won't fixing anything that's damaged by the user.